$28,350. That’s how much Ford’s all-new Universal Electric Platform-based pickup truck — which it is calling the Ford Fathom — will cost when it hits the market next year. This comes shortly after Slate announced pricing for its truck: $24,950. Which is the better deal? Well, it’s hard to know, especially since we’ve learned that its range will not be 300 miles as I previously thought.
Ok, right away, let’s add some destination charges. The Ford Fathom electric pickup truck comes out to $29,945, while the Slate costs $26,400. That’s $3,545 more for the Ford truck. Is it worth it?
I obviously don’t have an answer, since I haven’t seen underneath the Fathom’s camouflage and I haven’t driven it (I have driven the Slate; I found it charming). But I wouldn’t be a journalist if I didn’t at least conjecture a bit, and my guess is that the Ford will offer a decent bit more for the money. Not only will the standard Fathom almost certainly come with power windows, but it also gets an infotainment screen:
Available for pre-order in early 2027, the midsize electric truck, with standard-range battery, has a starting MSRP of $28,350* competing in the heart of the affordable EV market.
But the price is the least interesting thing about it. Projected to have more passenger volume than a Toyota RAV4, with a large, high-resolution touch screen, bidirectional power capability, digital key, as well as a frunk and bed for added cargo flexibility, Fathom seats five adults and is just as comfortable on a workday commute as it is on a weekend adventure.
Advanced technology adds value to the already well-equipped Fathom. Every truck is BlueCruise capable, and the Fathom’s BlueCruise integration with Apple Maps offers a more seamless on-ramp to off-ramp experience. Fathom is also Apple CarPlay and Android Auto capable.
[Note: The “the price is the least interesting thing about it” seems like an odd quote given that the price is the thing. -DT]
It’s worth noting that, later in the press release, Ford writes “It will also maintain compatibility with standard CarPlay and Android Auto.” I’m going to read that as those two being standard on the truck. Another, more important standard feature on the Ford and not on the Slate is four doors, which is pretty much a requirement on any high-volume vehicle in 2026:
But here’s the critical question we don’t have answered yet, and that I myself kind of thought had been answered: How far will the Ford Fathom drive on a single charge? (The Slate will do 205mi).
The reason why I say I thought it had been answered is that, on Ford’s website, there’s a Q&A in which The Blue Oval says its plan is to offer 300 miles of range:
Q: Is the goal to extend range as far as possible on the UEV, or is there a certain threshold of range, say 300 miles, that Ford deems sufficient to balance cost and range anxiety?
A: Our strategy is to meet the expectation of some customers of around 300 miles of range. Instead of using larger, more expensive batteries to achieve this, we are focusing on extreme vehicle efficiency through aerodynamics, weight reduction, and energy management to achieve similar range with a smaller, lower-cost battery.
We all know Ford — and any automaker — can offer an electric vehicle with 300 miles of range; just chuck a big enough battery into it. But the story of the Ford Universal EV pickup is its starting price of under $30,000, so to answer that question by saying the goal is to hit 300 miles of range without pairing that number with another constraint made me think that the other constraint was implied — i.e. it was the $30,000 starting price.
Anyway, it appears I was mistaken. Per Ford, the $28,350 ($29,945 after fees) base Fathom is not expected to achieve an EPA-estimated range of 300 miles. If you want 300 miles of range, you have to pay extra. And we don’t yet know how much. From Ford:
We have said previously that some customers will want to see an EPA-estimated range of around 300 miles and we will have an option for that customer.
The truth is, I suspected $100-per-mile of range was too good to be true. After Autopian member Life’s Short; Drive Fast! commented last month about the truck’s features, I admitted that — at the price point ($30,000; I think Life’s Short; Drive Fast! may have edited in the $40,000 figure after the fact), 300 miles seemed super ambitious:
I guess my intuition was correct, and my reading of Ford’s Q&A response was not. In any case, this all leads me to wonder: How much range does the base Ford Fathom have to offer to be competitive? Or, put another way, how much does the 300-mile truck have to cost to be competitive?
Let’s talk about the competition.
You can buy a Nissan Leaf with 303 miles of range for about $33,000 all-in:
A Chevy Equinox EV offers 319 miles of range for about $37,000:
For under $39,000, you can buy a Tesla Model 3 with 321 miles of range:
A Chevy Bolt, at $28,995, offers a range of 262 miles:
And a 245-mile-range Hyundai Ioniq 5 costs about $37,000:
But are these the Fathom’s competitors? I just named a bunch of crossovers/hatchbacks. The Ford Fathom is a small pickup, like the Ford Maverick Hybrid, a $30,000 gas car free from range anxiety and with basically the same base price as the Fathom:
Ford has made it clear that the Fathom is not meant to be a car solely for EV enthusiasts; Ford has called the Universal EV Platform the company’s “Model T Moment.” In other words: This vehicle has to appeal to everyone.
If the average person has to choose between a 38 mpg Maverick and a 220 mile Fathom, are they choosing the Fathom? What if its 250 miles? 270?
I don’t have an answer. We haven’t even seen what the Fathom looks like, or all the features it will offer. If it’s extremely stylish and feature-rich, maybe I’d be tempted at 250 miles for $30 big-ones? Or maybe I’d drop the $35 grand (or whatever it ends up being) for the 300 mile variant, as that’s still a great price if the vehicle is cool.
But with such heavy depreciation on EVs, $30-35 big-ones goes a long way these days on the used market. Though I remain excited about this truck, it’s a lot to think about; when we finally have the base range and the price for the bigger battery, plus a look at the feature list and the styling, I’ll be doing even more thinking about the new, sub-$30,000 Ford Fathom.
Top photo: Ford
Part of the Slate’s appeal to me is exactly that it’s small. My use case isn’t in the heart of the market, but I’m an empty-nester in a fairly dense city, so a small 2-door pickup is more up my alley than a longer 4-door one. (A few years ago, I test drove a RAV4 for a day and it felt noticeably bigger than I wanted; my favorite car for length has been a 2010s Golf, at around 166″). If I could keep a fuller roof and a back seat in the garage for stretches when that was preferable, the Slate is how I’d rather roll. Its sparsity lands with me as a plus, not a problem, as long as the a/c is decent.
I can’t Fathom why they chose that name. It’s bad.
I would still be firmly in the Slate camp. It is cheaper, and more aligns with my needs. I don’t need 4 doors, I’d rather have the bed space or just less car to move around. I don’t want Blue Cruise or really any driver aid that is also leveraged to keep tabs on me.
This is aimed at the mass market, but is forgetting that the gov’t has made EV ownership harder for the mass market. This thing and the Maverick are going to duke it out.
Executives at every Chinese automaker on reading this: “Hmm. Where are we going for lunch?”
That front shot with the camo is giving off some strong Hammerhead Eagle i-Thrust vibes.
I believe that the Fathom and the Slate serve are aimed at two distinct sets of buyers. The Slate for those who want a small, simple, two door pickup at as low a price as possible, with minimal tech. The Fathom is aimed at everybody else. The actual conflict will be between the Fathom and the Maverick, as pointed out in the article.
This will not be a model T moment for Ford since the Model T came out when there was little to no competition for basic, very low priced affordable for the common person, tough and simple auto. Nowadays there are other choices in this arena. Plus 30k these days is not quite affordable for the common folk, if they have any wits about them.
Fathom a silly name.
They’re calling it the Fathom???
Did they ask some marketing person to come up with the STUPIDEST name possible???
Because I can’t FATHOM A DUMBER NAME.
Why couldn’t they bring back a solid name with some history like Courier or Ranchero?
Or repurpose an old Mercury name like Lynx or Bobcat.
I was thinking the same thing, Courier and Ranchero were right there. They could have even gone with F-50 and claimed it was part of the F-Series line, or Maverick Sport, and claimed they electrified the Maverick
Fathom sounds like either generic store brand line of camping equipment and backpacks, or a mid 90s concert car focused on Xtrem active outdoor lifestyles in a how’d you do, fellow kids, kind of way
Ford F-ME. There, part of the F Series.
seems like they could’ve gone a little…deeper…into their extensive back catalog
I think Ford likely has the better long term prospects here. I think the Slate will initially be popular as the new cool thing, what with its kinda novel looks and with all the custom options available. It’s promised ease to repair will also be a draw for some, but I think once the novelty wears off and the initial group of people who have been enthusiastically waiting a simple, bare bones, 2 door truck get in, the demand for a truck with no power anything or even a radio will drop precipitously.
Ford on the other had, is playing it safe with 4 doors and all the comforts that most people expect now. Range of course will play into these arguments but as long as it’s over 220 or so it’s probably passable for most people and certainly for the local service types (exterminators, HVAC repair, etc.) that are currently using a ton of Mavericks. Also, the Slate range is even lower than that and lacks the option (theoretical on the Ford at this point but apparently promised) of opting for an extended range version. However, if Ford comes in a 150 for a base range, I think that will likely be an issue for some people. Whether this issue is real or perceived is generally irrelevant. If the person who is supposed to be signing on the line for a 72 months of payments thinks it’s an issue, it is.
Personally, if I were in the market the Ford would be an intriguing prospect but my decision would likely hinge on the range being over the 220ish line if AWD is on option sheet. Living on Hill Road in snowy New England having a job that I have to make it in for most times, it’s kind of a necessity. So far Slat has only nodded this was as a future possibility. I haven’t seen much from Ford on if it will be an option at release or at all.
Ford has said AWD will be available, presumably at launch since it is such a high take rate on their other pickups and utilities. I would not be surprised if that AWD option is locked behind the extended range battery paywall, just like the Maverick initially had it locked behind the Ecoboost paywall. Once the Hybrid became the extra cost option then it could have AWD.
I see a lot of “oh Slate is now dead” comments that I can’t wrap my brain around. I honestly don’t think this truck has suddenly taken a whole bunch of people who were interested in the Slate away. I think Slate’s simplicity and 2 door design had already driven away the vast majority people who only wanted “electric small truck”. Nothing that was said by Ford here made me suddenly think I should have this over a Slate. The Fathom just means you can have another vehicle tying you tighter and tighter to life long OEM repairs. I’ll take my right to repair, thank you Slate.
Yeah, I don’t think there is any one vehicle that should be considered a competitor for Slate, because so much of what Slate offers appeals to a specific kind of person (which I think most of us here are): wants simplicity, reliability, ease of DIY maintenance, etc. Most drivers don’t look for any of that. They want comfort and gadgets and to not ever think about their car if they can help it.
The reason that this will harm the Slate is because it WILL offer more features and better practicality, for only a 10% higher price.
Anyone who wants to option up a Slate to anything more than a 2-passenger truck will have something to cross-shop with.
We differ here. I think those people ALREADY self selected out of the Slate.
Slate obviously disagrees with you. If they thought their sole market was going to be people who wanted 2-passenger trucks, they wouldn’t have designed the SUV conversion kit.
I will have to continue to disagree. I don’t think building an SUV is a response to a 4 door truck at all. Clearly we aren’t going to agree on this.
I’m still team Slate. Ford is including a lot of stuff I no longer want – digital key, infotainment, “Advanced Technology” which probably includes a dependency on Ford’s own servers and the ability gather data about my actions. As long as I can install my own stereo in the Slate with a standard DIN setup, I’m fine.
So you’re saying that a $28k, 300mi EV truck is in fact unfathomable?
I don’t know enough to answer the range question… so I’d ask what is the number needed for local trades folk? Around here the continued success of the maverick seems to be local trades and company on-site work vehicles. Add a good power delivery package, reasonable means for a ladder rack/topper, and “enough” range and I think this will crush it.
RIP Slate
I thought Ranchero would have been a terribly hackneyed name for this thing and was amused at all of the… anoraks? That predicted its use, but Ford was cooking up something properly janky in the meth trailer for this one. It could do 500 miles on a 15 minute charge but I could never fathom owing one.
Ranchero is still better than Fathom.
Why couldn’t they use the old Courier name? Or repurpose some old Mercury names like Bobcat or Lynx.
I agree that Fathom is bad, but I’m old enough to remember the associations with the names Bobcat and Lynx, and I don’t think anyone wants to revive the specters of the Pinto and Escort in anyone’s imagination. Ranchero would be nearly perfect if it were a two-door, but the name (just like El Camino) evokes such a specific thing throughout its history (basically truck bed on a car chassis) that it’s kinda hard for me to imagine Ford using it for something less striking. Then again, the Mach E is nothing like any previous Mustang, so what do I know.
It all comes down to that base price and range. Ford, I think, kinda found the perfect number to crush Slate. A bit more, but also pretty well under $30k. Add all the real car options the average person wants and now you have a Slate crusher.
I fall into the “probably never going to buy new unless the price is reasonable” category. This is above that threshold, unfortunately, while the Slate almost hits it. With the new CA EV rebate of $3500, maybe this is still there?
I feel like Ford under-delivered here, while the Slate barely delivered. But, I don’t know, those standard features are very compelling compared to the Slate, so I can’t say for sure if I am a NOPE or not, other than the thought of a payment I don’t want and really shouldn’t afford.
A couple commenters mentioned the Falcon and it got me thinking – they should just call this one the Falcon. Fathom is a terrible name, and if they really want an “F” name, just pull another Maverick and resurrect an old car nameplate. They don’t make cars anymore anyway, so it’s not like they’ll be using that name for a sedan one day.
Falcon is a much better name.
Ranchero was right there.
Yeah, I feel like this should very much have been a Ranchero, but we all know they wanted a fresh name for the “new model-T”.
I like Ranchero, too, but there were some ugly-ass rancheros and without the historical context that most buyers won’t have anyway I don’t think it’s a great name. On its own merits Falcon is a better name than Ranchero I think.
Plus the Falcon Ranchero is, IMO at least, the best looking Ranchero and seems most in line with this design.
Call it the Falcon. Make Ranchero a retro trim level.
Or Falcon Mach E
9/10 people have no connection to the name “Ranchero” and the 1/10 that do will never buy this thing.
We’ve been sitting here thinking about a name for months and we got nothing. Wait a minute!… thinking… thinking… thinking… [googles synonyms for “thinking” starting with “F”]. I GOT IT GUYS!
Torch in the corner with a canned ham – “No, no, that says ‘Fat Ham.’ The Ford Fat Ham! It’s perfect!”
Torch in the corner with a canned ham sounds like an Autopian version of Clue.
The Autopian version of Clue is too easy, since it’s always Uncle Adrian.
Uncle Adrian in the Rodious with a turn signal stalk?
David in the shower with the colander.
This is more Tamarian than Clue.
I would buy the sh!t out of one of these
“No, no, that says ‘Fat Ham”
Or FATHORN
Thunderlectricfalconbird
Courier would be my pick. It was the original name of Ford’s small pickup… unless you want to go waaaay back to the AA and TT trucks.
Hell… the original F-series model, the F1, is probably about the same size as a modern ‘small’ pickup.
So the ‘F1’ name would be better… though they might have a name conflict with Formula 1 racing.
Ah, good call, I remember thinking the Courier was the right name when they first announced this but everyone keeps saying to call it Ranchero.
Just like the Maverick: Announce a sub-$30k base price then watch the orders roll in for models optioned up by $5-10k.
Don’t forget the Additional Dealer Markup.
That only applies to cars they have in inventory. When I ordered mine the dealership told me that Ford was taking a really hard line on markups, and they honestly hoped that people would cancel their orders so they could have one on the lot and charge more for it.
A distinction without a difference. Most American consumers buy off the lot or maybe what’s in inventory 3 hours away and have it transfer. Most don’t order their cars. And while yes you have to order a Slate, but all Slate buyers will get that pricing consistency benefit.
So even Ford recognizes it as an issue. It’s not like my comment was pulled out of my ass. It comes from clear pricing practices that many Ford dealers have taken when it comes to new releases (Maverick, Lightning, Bronco…). I expect this to be no different.
For a buzzy new release where manufacturing can’t keep up people order pretty frequently. I bet the order books will fill up quickly on this.
I didn’t accuse you of pulling anything out of your ass. Obviously dealer markups are a common and annoying part of buying cars, but the way around it for something new and popular is to order it.
Dead on Arrival from the dumb name to the inevitable crappy range.
I cannot fathom why they’re not calling this the Ranchero.
Unless they’re planning on offering a Fathom Ranchero edition to invoke memories of the Falcon Rancheros of old.
The maximum range of any EV seems to be the metric the press likes to focus on.
That’s not that big of a deal now!
We’ve had an EV in the stable for going on 3 years now, and I think that for most EV users, anything over ~225 miles is MORE than adequate to handle daily driving needs (work/store/school/naked-twister party) all in a day with zero worry of running out of juice. Guessing maybe that’s 90% of buyers? Certainly others with longer daily drives would want more, but I don’t see any difference between 225 and 350, other than added weight and costs.
The miles/kWh is a much more useful and practical metric when EV shopping, but it seems lost in the noise. The Slate is (I think) going to come in less than 3 miles / kWh. Since Ford is focusing (no pun intended) on efficiency with the new platform, I would expect 4 miles/kWh at least. That’s a 25% improvement is cost to operate. It adds up.
I’m excited to see this, and I’m still thinking that if it’s offered with AWD and towing around 3,500-4000 lbs I’d probably sell off our Ioniq 6 AND our 25 Maverick hybrid and go all in on this. Nice to have only one vehicle to insure as well as put a little $ in my pocket. Now that there are more reliable places to charge on the interstate, having an EV is now practical for those occasional road trips even if you have to stop a little more and wait a little longer to top off compared to the larger battery/faster charging EV option$.
CarPlay, power windows, power mirrors (presumably) with blind side detection are all bonus + 4 doors and one day AWD + towing all make this worth the extra $ compared to the Slate. At least for our use case.
The other key is charge speed. 250 miles of range is fine with 150 kW or higher charge rates. Without that an EV is strictly a local / regional vehicle like my 2017 Bolt EV.
Agreed. I assume FORD knows this. I’ve not seen anything specific on the level 1/2/3 charge rates. Hopefully it will be reasonably quick and not drop too far at levels > 80%.
800V architecture would be nice. Has there been any word on that?
I think I read they’re going 400v.
They ARE going with a 48v low voltage bus for most of the power devices, along with a DC-DC converter to get a 12v source for accessories.
The 400v is disappointing, but very unsurprising. A higher-voltage architecture would be better for future-proofing, but adds cost, and when cost is your highest priority, a high-voltage architecture is going to get tossed really quick. I mean, maybe they could have done the split pack thing like GM does for the giant pack for cheaper than a real 800V architecture? But I dunno. That would have been pretty neat, though. A smaller pack that can charge super-quick would be really useful for me.
The Telo is going for the split-pack design as well. But that’s just vaporware so far, and the price is higher than this. It’s also in general a far more radical design. If it ever hits the market, I’ll be excited for it. But I think it’s super likely it will never make it that far.
I disagree. My ’19 bolt has been all over the eastern half of the country and while DCFC is slower than other models it’s still perfectly serviceable. Now, I will acknowledge that different people have different goals when they road trip and if I were focused on speed from Point A to Point B then it’s a bit of a drag, but I’m a “the journey is the intent” kind of traveler so L2 charging at a hotel has covered about 90% of my road trip needs.
I also keep seeing that cars with faster charge rates still advertize “10% to 80% in 20-30 minutes” because even with a nice fast charge rate, the charging curve and battery size can offset that fast rate.
Agreed. I’ve been only doing up to 70% for my road trip fast charging sessions. It shaves about 5-10 minutes off of the charging time and makes it feel more like a gas station stop. I don’t feel restrained at all time wise road tripping an EV and would rather just stop and see more places if I have to charge
My ’19 Bolt would add nearly 2 hours to the trip I make most often, and that’s why it stays parked and I take the Volt. No way no how am I spending an extra 2 hours on a drive I already hate.
In general if I’m travelling more than 200 miles from home (and not flying) the trip would require multiple charges per day.
For example last year we drove up to Winthrop, WA in February to x-country ski. That is a 400 mile trip, at highway speeds, over a mountain pass and running the heat which in the Bolt consumes about 20% of the battery running it just enough to keep the windshield clear. The realistic range on a charge is 170 miles so that trip would require 2 charges at an hour each to go 10% to 70%. With the trip already taking 8 hours I’m not looking to add another 2 hours each way.
Same with our trip last March to Baker City to x-country ski.
20 to 30 minutes to charge is reasonable to me on longer trips. 1 hour is not.
Duplicated comment. Damn work distracting me from my commenting duties….
“CarPlay, power windows, power mirrors (presumably) with blind side detection are all bonus + 4 doors and one day AWD + towing all make this worth the extra $ compared to the Slate. At least for our use case.”
Every one of these are something I would definitely not want in a pickup truck. My current truck is a rusty 2WD, regular-cab truck with hand crank windows and mirrors I have to adjust by pushing on the glass with my thumb.
The Slate is definitely more like my use case.
power windows, power mirrors, power door locks… all adjustable from the driver’s seat are now well proven tech, as well as blind-side detection.
I really do applaud SLATE’s simplicity; I even had a very early reservation that I eventually cancelled, but IMHO opinion, SLATE went too far. SLATE can do tech (cruise control, power door locks, key fob), but in their quest to come to market with a lower tech vehicle, I think they went from simple to dumb in order to get some marketing bullet points. (power windows would probably have also been cheaper to source).
I wish SLATE well, as competition improves the breed, but FORD looks to eat their lunch for most buyers.
This is a fascinating thought process:
Theoretically option a Slate with equal options as this new Fathom, and which are you then buying? Add the windows and the tech. Then where are we at?? Would you get the Slate or Fathom? Do those two extra seats make the difference? I kinda think they do. Add in the historical nameplate that everyone knows, I think the Slate is toast.
The wife and I like the experience of vintage things. Last month we rode on the East Troy Electric Railroad and spent a day at Greenfield Village at the Henry Ford. We also have no need for rear seating, as it’s just the two of us, and we also have a Trax if we ever need to bring a 3rd or 4th person along.
I personally like using the hand-cranks to roll down/up the windows and inserting the key to unlock the doors as well as the keyed ignition. We don’t own smart-phones, so not having an ‘Infotainment’ screen also appeals to us. I’m also old-fashioned enough to just be able to add those little mirror corner add-ons to help with seeing blond spots.
We’re still leaning towards the Slate. I already added a 50A service to my garage last year.
But it IS that big of a deal, and trying to tell a customer “No, you don’t need that off-road capability/towing capability/range/3-row seating etc” just isn’t going to sell vehicles. Meeting the market where it’s at is the move, and the market isn’t particularly rational when it comes to EV range, just as it isn’t particularly rational about, well, a lot. It is made up of human beings, after all.
Giving customers what they want, not necessarily what they need is like Sales 101. I don’t know why so many commenters need to be told this.
FWIW Marketing 101 is that the customer don’t actually know what they want – it’s your job to tell them. Famously in hte late 90s Lexus began telling consumers that they only wanted the image of off-road capability with the first RX. If customers actually want capability they’d still insist that family SUVs have box frames and low-range.
So when auto journalists fixate on something, customers fixate on it too. Tell someone that 250 miles of range isn’t adequate and they’ll believe you. I see jouranlist harp on 80% charge times, but they never mention that stopping for gas when you’re running 5 minutes late can be a thing of the past.
If you’re anything like me, you’re late way more often than you drive over 250 miles in a day.
There is some truth to “people don’t know what they want.” Ex: the Maverick was out of left field, and it’s selling like crazy. I’m not sure it quite applies with something like range.
Journalists for years now have been harping on about how range is overrated and that cars are offering too much of it. But the reality is: People want it, so it matters. Just like they want hybrids. (GM famously tried telling customers what they want by skipping hybrids; they’re now doing a 180).
Selling cars is hard, but telling folks what they want instead of meeting where they are only works for certain vehicle attributes.
Also, I still think, if you can’t charge at home or at work, skip buying an EV. Maybe I’d be in favor of a high-range one you can charge weekly.
“FWIW Marketing 101 is that the customer don’t actually know what they want”
Truth.
And not just when it comes to cars.
Also, much of the time what someone wants is STUPID.
Case in point… a close friend and his wife were having their 3rd kid. So they’d need something bigger than their VW Passat.
The wife wanted a big assed SUV. Another friend and I told him that if it’s space he wanted, then it’s a minivan he should get. And they cost less than the big assed SUV too!
Economics and logic won out over his wife’s desire for a huge SUV… which I’m 99% sure was rooted in portraying an image and using ‘we need a bigger vehicle’ as an excuse.
Had Apple designed the iPad by committee and with the input of consumers, they would have had a failure on their hands. Instead they designed a device that basically excels at one or two things at the expense of all other PC functions and it’s one of the most important devices of this century.
Makes sense David, at least for marketing to those that haven’t gone electric yet… but once you’ve had an EV at home (and have home charging at those sweet, sweet low residential rates), you kind of shrug at anything over 250 miles or so considering that unlike just making a gas tank larger; adding extra miles to an EV can be a VERY expensive option regarding battery size, cost and weight.
EV owners know that size isn’t that important 🙂
(that’s what I keep telling her)
I’m with you!
I’m right there with you. We’ve been running a standard-range (~220 mile) Lightning for 3 years, taking it on many road trips even in winter, and the range has not been much of an issue. Would more range be nice? Sure, but not for the $10,000 price jump.
I think if the base Fathom hits 250 that will be very good. 275 would be outstanding.
One under-discussed factor is the bi-directional charging. This could be a huge selling point. Ford really biffed it with the Lightning, the hookup for bi-directional charging was something like $10k. If they can offer bi-directional with a reasonable hookup cost, that is like getting a couple Tesla Powerwalls thrown in for free, which starts to approach the value of the Fathom itself.
@Life’s short; drive fast- how do you like the I6? My wife likes its looks and a used one might be our next buy
I give the I6 9.5 out of 10. Some minor Hyundai quirks ( doesn’t remember silly stuff like one-pedal (i-pedal) mode or auto bright headlights, and has those unfortunate pop-out handles though they remain mechanical functionality). We’ve the 2-motor AWD Limited and it’s a fine grand tourer compared to the 23 Bolt EUV premier we had. Fast (0-60 under 5 seconds), quiet, comfortable despite the unfortunate low-profile tires, and seeing 4 miles/kWh in town. Crazy fast level-3 charging. Ours has auto parking which we’ll never use, but I do like the surround cameras and all the safety nannies + adoptive cruise + lane centering. Cool stuff like 2 tone ambient lighting is nicer that you expect, and dumb stull like no ability to connect into a local (home) lan over WiFi you live with.
Didn’t come with wireless carplay, but that’s easy to add with a $25 dongle. Does have a good wireless charger.
No spare, so we keep one in the trunk.
OH – also has standard 120v AC/15amp 120 outlet at the back seat and/or you can plug in a 120v AC/15 amp outlet into the charge port with the proper adapter, making it a great option for power outage extension cord use to keep a fridge and some lights, maybe a fan going for days and days
Best was the price+warranty. New MSRP was 56K. Got it last year used as a CPO. 6000 miles on it 4/5 bumper to bumper and 9/10 powertrain warranty left paid only $28K or so, delivered to my door. Practically new (and it already had the dreaded ICCU fix). I’d buy it again without reservation.
Great to hear, thanks for the detail. I’ve been seeing low-mileage used examples in the price range you mentioned, that seems like a deal if you like the styling.
My neighbor thought is was a Porsche 🙂
Bi-directional charging may be complicated electrically as I think you need something to prevent back feeding home power circuits when power goes on/off. The vehicle won’t have enough power to carry a full house (200 amp circuit at 240 volts).
Better choice is just adding as a standard built in 120v AC outlet(s). See Ioniq 6 comment below. Simple Vehicle To Load. V2L
With the Lightning you had to buy the Power Station Pro and Integration system or some such integration kit and it was really expensive. It could do up to 9kW at 220. For those customers who have solar like me a lot of that kit was redundant and not nearly worth the price
Tell me more about the redundancy with solar. I should do this.
With our solar setup we had to install an automatic shutoff switch, so if the grid goes down the connection to the grid is turned off to prevent backfeeding. Depending on how its wired, I don’t see why the same switch couldn’t manage an EV as well.
We also installed a Powerwall, which in effect does the same thing I believe
Agreed. Like Life’s Short comment below, 120v outlets do a lot of lifting for on-the-go stuff but the fact the big battery can be used in power outages or as a powerbank in general is incredibly underutilized. I’ve totally written off the need for a whole-home backup generator because EVs capabilities, and a used EV is a fraction of the cost of a Powerwall.
Yeah, the 120V outlets in most EVs are super useful for running a few things. But big-picture, enabling bi-directional power to connect tens or hundreds of thousands of EVs both ways to the grid could represent a huge benefit to both individual and grid resilience
GM is marketing their solution: https://gmenergy.gm.com/vehicle-to-home
https://www.theautopian.com/gm-launches-new-gm-energy-division-so-its-electric-vehicles-can-feed-the-power-grid/
This sounds like exactly what I wanted when I was looking and ended up getting a Mach E instead. I REALLY wanted an electric truck, but the F-150 Lightning was just too expensive at the time.
When it comes time for me to get a new vehicle, this platform should be a few years into availability and hopefully have all the “first gen” kinks worked out.
We also wanted a single EV to do it all… small size, efficient, trucklet style, towing around 4000 lbs, AWD, all the safety Nannie’s, CarPlay. Push buttons and knobs. No self driving, self parking, or electric door handles. Level 3 Charging speed and capacity acceptable for the not too often road trip.
The lightning and GM EV pickups are too large, the rivian too expensive and too tech.
The Slate looked promising at first ( I especially like the plastic panels), but no AWD, limited towing, and way too stripped for our taste.
We wound up getting 2 vehicles. A Maverick AWD hybrid, and a Hyundai Ioniq 6 AWD sedan). We very happy with both, but really think the new Ford Fathom EV may be able to do it all-in-one for us. Ditto on waiting to year 2 to buy one though.
Does anyone EVER use the word “fathom” in a positive meaning? It’s always something like “I couldn’t even fathom…” or “that cost more than I could ever fathom” like it’s something limiting. It’s like why even bother because you can’t imagine X Y or Z. It doesn’t sound positive.
It’s because the real truck will only be 1.83 meters long.
Only in pools when pretending to be a submarine.
“Descending to 1.2 fathoms captain!”
Maybe just call it “Oliver”
Ford Fathom
Ford Comprehend
Ford Realization
Ford Actualization
Ford Enlightenment
Ford Nirvana
Ford Mindblown
“Ford Mindblown”
We’re only getting that model if they bring back Mercury.
Ford Teleological Suspension of the Ethical
Ford Epiphany
Ford Breakthrough
Ford Well I’ll Be Damned
I think people say the bottom one about Ford already
Whoops, double comment
Ford Fathom
Ford Nautical Mile
Ford Rod
Ford Cubit
Good to see they had the common sense to skip Ford Perch and Ford Hogshead.
Ford Butt
I’m pro-Slate but if Ford manages to actually release this vehicle even close to the promises and it doesn’t immediately burn everyone’s house down then Slate is in for a bad time.
If they can hit, say, 225 miles of range on the base battery, I’ll be making a reservation. It hits all the things I’d want:
Now let’s hope they get the little things right like having the charge port in a Supercharger-compatible place. They definitely should have gone with Ranchero as the name but Fathom is fine.
Good news is that the Fathom was already announced as supporting android auto and apple car play and is using Apple Maps for the built in software as well for better integration with the range and charging metrics as well as future bluecruise support
Pictures are online of one of the camo units charging at a Supercharger and unfortunately the charge port is in the driver’s side rear.
It’s not a dealbreaker but I have no idea why you’d do that on a ground-up new platform. I get they’re rolling out the longer cords, etc, but c’mon!
I finally looked up those spy shots and yes it is on the driver’s side rear but that’s “correct” in that it’s the same place as on Teslas. So we’re good!
That isn’t the correct position, it is a bad position since most people can’t back up worth a damn.
Curious why this is being rolled out as a separate model when it seems so much like an electric-only variant of the Maverick? Maverick Lightning would be the easy name… if the F-150 Lightning wasn’t such a flop.
Still waiting for my check from Ford’s Marketing Dept.
Was the F150 Lightning really a flop? I see tons of them, more than any other EV pickup. Anyone I know that owns one loves it too and wishes you could still get it. Sure, it didn’t sell in numbers close to a normal F150, but for a first gen of something, I thought it was all around a solid vehicle and a base hit if not double. Sure, not the home run they were hoping for, but I’d argue it was far from a flop and poor product planning to discontinue it. Only aiming for home runs seems like an unrealistic way to run a business.
That does seem to be Ford’s thing at this point, swinging for the fences all the time. I get the why, but at the same time, the Escape for instance was a decent overall package for many people, but it had to go b/c it wasn’t awesome in any one thing it seems; meanwhile, the Trax seems to be selling really well.
Even with the discontinuation I believe there were more Lightnings sold that R1Ts or Cybertrucks. Of course the R1T will eventually surpass the Lightning. So no definitely not a flop.
I owned a Lightning and indeed it is an awesome truck. The used prices are getting into the 30s now, too. I’m convinced Ford would have had a blockbuster if they focused on the Pro as their sole model and optioned it up from there. Coming out of the gates trying to push as many Platinums as possible after the 40K vaporware marketing was obnoxious. And the bad luck of introducing it during a supply chain apocalypse was another hit. I ended up lemon lawing mine due to an unobtainable critical part.
To be clear, I really meant: it was floppy enough for them to cease production, so Ford clearly has an opinion about it.
Lightning seemed fine to me, but I didn’t mean it as a judgement (though I also have absolutely no skin in the Full Size Truck Game soooooo all with a grain of salt, folks)